Ralph Goodale

[Rail Transportation, September 20th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, for the third time, I have a question for the Minister of Transport about his government's rail service review, which is almost a year old. It said that the shippers of grain, oilseeds and special crops, forest products, minerals and the like were getting very bad service from the railways at a very high cost, and it called for new legislation to enforce binding contracts on the railways.

Will that legislation be introduced and enacted in this calendar year? For the third time, yes or no?

[Questions on the Order Paper, September 19th, 2011]

With regard to the ongoing disputes between the National Research Council of Canada (NRC) and one of its former employees, Dr. Chander Grover, between January 1, 2004, and October 31, 2010: (a) how much money has the NRC spent on legal services and costs for services provided by external legal counsel; (b) how much money has the NRC spent on legal services and costs for services provided by the Department of Justice; (c) how much money has the NRC spent on external communications advice; and (d) how much has the NRC spent on external consultants?

[Restoring Mail Delivery for Canadians Act, June 23rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, in light of the polarized ideological barbs that have gone back and forth between the government and the official opposition in the last few minutes, I wonder if the minister could tell us what in fact has been accomplished by that type of exchange. The postal system is still dysfunctional, the workers are still out of work, the small businesses across this country that depend on Canada Post are still without service. Why can the minister not adopt a more constructive approach?

Will the minister entertain specific constructive amendments to her legislation to try to improve that legislation and actually get this problem solved rather than have ideological polarization on the floor of the House of Commons? What good does that do?

[Rail Transportation, June 23rd, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, for the second time in this young Parliament, I would like to ask the minister of transport about the federal rail service review.

After four years of study, that review was completed last October. It identified the key problem as an unfair imbalance in market power favouring railways, harming shippers and resulting in globally inferior service.

There is no excuse for more delay. Will the minister guarantee that the legislation to meet the needs of shippers will be presented in this House and enacted before the end of this calendar year?

[Disaster Assistance, June 20th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, for the second year in a row massive flooding is damaging Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Another five inches of rain fell this past weekend in places like Yellow Grass, Radville, Weyburn, Estevan and Roche Percee. Infrastructure has again been eroded and millions of acres of farmland will not get seeded again. The western premiers want a better national response to such disasters.

Could premiers Wall and Selinger be assured today that the federal government would support a new national disaster strategy with greater federal compensation and more investment in prevention in the first place?

[Transportation, June 8th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, farmers in Ontario have the right to vote.

After four years of study, a federal rail service review reported last October that shippers of grain, forest products and other commodities are getting seriously inferior services. The problem is an imbalance in market power, which strongly favours the railways.

After a further delay of six months, the government agreed last March to correct that imbalance. It only takes a simple amendment to the Canada Transportation Act but the throne speech was oddly silent on that issue.

Will the government commit unequivocally to enact that new legislation before the end of this calendar year?

[National Defence, March 25th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, the Parliamentary Budget Officer demolished Conservative war plane calculations. The U.S. Government Accountability Office says that, indeed, the price has doubled to $30 billion. It is stealth pricing. The Pentagon says that it is even worse.

That is what we get with no competition. We do not get the right plane at the best price with the best industrial benefits, and it crowds out seniors and students, child care, health care and housing. Sixty-eight per cent of Canadians say that the government is wrong on the jet plane fiasco.

Why that choice?

[Government Accountability, March 25th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, in contempt of Canadians, the Conservative regime is hiding $70 billion in bad choices: $10 billion for mega jails, $30 billion for extra corporate tax cuts, and $30 billion for stealth war planes, so that family care, health care, seniors and students get crowded off the agenda.

The government is spending one thousand times more for war planes than for students. These will cost $1,000 for every man, woman and child in this country.

Why no competitive bidding? This smells like a scheme designed by Bruce Carson.

[Government Priorities, March 24th, 2011]

Mr. speaker, nobody will take lessons on democracy from that crowd.

We have Conservative contempt for students and seniors, and young parents needing child care. We have Conservative contempt for families looking after sick or aging loved ones at home. We have Conservative contempt for Parliament and taxpayers in hiding $70 billion and falsifying documents. We have the Conservatives being hauled into court on election fraud and being investigated by the RCMP for influence peddling.

Is applying these Conservative standards how a twice bankrupt, disbarred lawyer and convicted felon gets to be the chief of staff to the Prime Minister?

[Government Priorities, March 24th, 2011]

Mr. Speaker, both the Pentagon and the Parliamentary Budget Officer have demolished the Conservatives on fighter jets. The cost is $30 billion, which is a thousand times more than help for students.

For low income seniors, the Conservatives offer a paltry $1.15 a day. The junior finance minister compares it to depression relief in the dirty thirties. Well that is a dirty insult.

Why did the Conservative regime waste more money in one day on the gluttonous G20 binge last summer than it would provide to low income seniors for a whole year?